The Art Thief vs. The Dinosaur Bloggers

This story concerns online art theft, copyright infringement, a plucky band of bloggers, and dinosaurs.  

How Not to Steal Artwork Online 

or, 

The Art Thief vs the Dinosaur Bloggers

Dramatis Personae:

• ART Evolved, the online paleo-art blog and network of approximately 20 paleontology-inspired artists and illustrators who blog.
• deviantArt (known as dA), the massive online art sharing site.  When I say massive, as of August 2010, dA has over 14.5 million members and over 100 million pieces of art uploaded into it (Wikipedia). For those in the science community unfamiliar with it, it acts like Facebook and Flickr, but heavier on the painting and drawing than photography with lots of manga and comics and inspired amateurs. 
• Dr. Manabu Sakamoto, aka Mambo-Bob, an artist contributor to Art Evolved and paleontologist at the University of Bristol. He blogs at The Raptor's Nest. 
• *theSpinosaurusGuy, aka Brenden, a dA user. 

The events:
Early yesterday morning, Manabu emailed the rest of the list of Art Evolved members about something all artists fear:  someone else was posting his artwork online and taking credit for it. This person, known by the dA pseudonym of theSpinosaurusGuy (real name listed as "Brenden") had posted about 12 of Manabu's dinosaur drawings on deviantArt and was taking credit for them, watermarking them with his pseudonym and posting dA-enabled widgets in his gallery saying they were not to be copied.

Another artist on dA who is also familiar with Manabu's work had alerted him.

You can see Manabu's artwork here in his online gallery.  Click on Allosaurus-top view for example.
You can see in the screen-captured images below, theSpinosaurusGuy clearly claiming this as his own.  Note the same Allosaurus top view drawing on the left. 

Click to enlarge.  Note the watermark on the right-hand image, claiming that as his own as well.

Note the watermark and the "artist's" comment.

It's theft.  Pure and simple.  It's not a re-use, or a fan homage to Manabu's art.  It's not a gallery where theSpinosaurusGuy collected his favourite pieces of art (dA does have that feature, and everything is clearly labeled as the original artists' work.) He is not claiming to be Dr. Manabu Sakamoto, he is instead claiming the artwork as his own labour.

Manabu doesn't have a deviantArt account.  A number of other dA members do however, and with a minimum of discussion, we acted as individuals, but part of a group helping our respected peer.

I started by making a brief comment on the Albertaceratops, the feathered raptor, the top-view Allosaurus and a few others.  DeviantArt is very aware that this type of behaviour can and does occur, and has a mechanism to deal with it.  Next to every posted artwork, there is a "Report a Violation" link, which allows you to write a brief description of the complaint, and provide a link to evidence it's a violation.

I filled about 6 of these out.  I also left comments beneath each one with links back to Manabu's gallery so others could see for themselves:  deviantArt is a very social site, you can add friends, comment and click "favourite" on art have nested conversations.  I left the comments so new visitors would see that theSpinosaurusGuy wasn't the artist he claimed to be.


The Art Evolved Network reacts:
Letting Manabu and our Art Evolved peeps know what I'd done, I came back a couple of hours later to find that theSpinosaurusGuy had blocked me from making further comments and labeled me a spammer. Of course, the comments I'd made were all deleted.

But it didn't matter.  You see, Peter Bond, of Bond's Blog and one of the driving forces behind the current Pink Dinosaur charity drive is also a dA user, and started to comment on the rest of the ones I had missed. And what Bond did was brilliant: he replied in the nested comments to previous commenters who had unwittingly praised the thief. Now, all of the people praising the work knew Spino-Brenden was a fraud.

While that was done, I had received automated messages from the dA moderators that they had removed the 6 pieces of art I had complained about: within about 4 hours! Not bad for a site with approximately 1.5 million comments daily!

Discussion in the Art Evolved emails was heating up.  More members of Art Evolved, like Ville Sinkonnen, Raven Amos, Trish Arnold and Nima Sassani jumped in and continued to post messages. Ville and Trish posted journal entries on dA about it, Peter re-posted Ville's, and I posted a critique of one of the works. Journals and critiques can't be deleted by the offender.

And we were civil:  let's be clear here, I think all of us recognized that theSpinosaurusGuy is likely somewhat young and naive about art, copyright and social media. This was not a pile-on with the intent rip him a new one.  Most of us called for the artist to stop deleting comments, feel ashamed, and give Manabu an apology.

More artwork was removed by the dA moderators (go moderators!) Some of theSpinosaurusGuy's former dA friends started to chastise him on his message wall. As I write this, only one of Manabu's drawings, a ceratosaurus, is still on the site.  Another dA user, not affiliated with Art Evolved has found that a computer-generated Barney the Dinosaur parody actually belongs to another artist Spino-Brenden has stolen from.

Message to theSpinosaurusGuy:
Once the jig was up, dude, if you're reading this, you should have apologized and taken them down immediately. Comments like the ones in the screen-capture below just enraged everyone.

Click to read the jackass-ishness.

 
As I said before, I suspect you are younger than many of us in Art Evolved, and probably in your teens.  DeviantArt is a great place where you can find a niche for almost anything and have positive contact with people, and maybe that's what you were looking for.  

And I get that.  One of the ways to appear as a respectable, sensible adult is to take responsibility for your mistakes. It's still not too late.  You'll continue to take some heat from some people on dA no doubt, but suffer through it, and become what you admire.   
 
What this means:  
There's a reason I asked Manabu and our Art Evolved peeps if I could write about this experience.

You see, the online world has changed things. Now there's a niche for artwork of every kind, and lots of people with similar interests can find each other quickly.  And while dinosaurs are granted a certain fondness and awesomeness in popular culture, there's a relatively small niche of artists passionate enough about them to be really into it.

Theft is going to get found out.

All of us on Art Evolved experienced a point in time where we made a decision to go online with our artwork.  It's a tough decision, and everyone frets to varying degrees about what will happen if our work is stolen.

• We slap copyright symbols on it, and some of us put obscuring watermarks on the images.
• We employ Creative Commons Licences, or rail against Google ImageSearch for making it so easy.  
• We vary on how much we protect our artwork, and how much we like to share it.  
• None of us is likely to know if an indie punk band in Vienna has downloaded our Diabloceratops for their gig posters.  

So if you're an aspiring artist looking to get into paleo-art or any kind of image, and you're nervous about making a big enough name for yourself online, here's some stuff you can do.

• Don't steal. 
• If it's a fan homage, say it is.  
• Don't re-post someone's stuff without asking.  
• If they have a blanket statement saying it's okay, make sure you link back to them and give them credit.   
• Always give artists, illustrators and image-makers credit. Always.
• Just ask.  Always ask if it's cool.  Most illustrators love feedback.
• Use the © symbol a lot. State what you want. 
• Blog.  Post comments elsewhere.  Reciprocate.
• Become friends and peers to others with similar interests. 
• If you can, be part of a network or group online. 
• "I got yer back" is one of the most heart-warming statements you can utter to a friend. 

If someone steals your work, 

• make a fuss. 
• Go through proper channels. 
• Be civil and intelligent when you dialogue. 
• Ask for help from your support network.  

I encourage anyone to put their artwork online.  And becoming part of a network makes everyone stronger than without it.

Thanks to:
All of the Art Evolved crew for giving one of our own your support and for carrying yourselves maturely. 

To the deviantArt moderators for reacting quickly.
To other dA artists for shaming the behaviour and not shrugging their shoulders. 

And to Manabu for agreeing I should write about this.

-Glendon Mellow
[All above opinions are my own.  Cross-posted on both Art Evolved and The Flying Trilobite]

- - - - - - - -

Artwork in those screen captures is by the talented Manabu Sakamoto © 2010 of The Raptor's Nest.

Going Pro: copyright in the new digital world

In the past few posts of Going Pro, we've looked a lot at copyright. Again, a lot of people have opinions, but it's important to see what the legal definitions -and what steps you can take to protect your creations- really entail.

Today though, I want to propose a question.

Suppose you post a nifty image of a prehistoric critter online. It's awesome, you're proud, people give you kudos. You put it under a Creative Commons Licence, the most restrictive one that says your image a) must be attributed to you, b) cannot be altered, c) others cannot profit from it, and otherwise, it's okay to post and share.

1. Then someone copies it. Another blogger. Does their own riff. Are you okay with that?

2. What if they're more famous than you, getting lots of illustration gigs, but they notice it, do their own version, and give you a nod for your cool idea. Still excited, feeling the attention?

3. What if your painting happens to hit the zeitgeist and goes all viral all over the interwebs. Everyone is sharing it. There's a day on Facebook where all the users switch to you image. But you haven't made a dime. What do you do?

We're in interesting territory. Personally, I don't believe overly restricting images (insanely huge watermarks, disabling right-clicking) are helpful to make a successful career anymore. But neither is completely open sharing.

Consider this:

[h/t Boing Boing]

It makes a strong case about question number 3, doesn't it? But how do you capitalize on that image going viral? How does it put food on the table?

I suggest it's how you parlay that viral dinosaur image into getting new contracts.

As for questions number 1 and 2, consider the post-modern, remixed, mash-up, variant-cover culture we live in. Think an Indiana Jones video game is fun? What about Indiana Jones Lego! Like Batman? Sharks? Lightsabers? Ta-da! (artist here) Authoring mash-ups and riffing on others' work is an integral part of pop culture.

Painting gets started at about the 4 minute mark in the video above.
[h/t to Boing Boing, again]

In the past, I've sometimes been the dissenting voice here at Art Evolved about all those posts showing past-art about upcoming themed galleries. I dislike them because sometimes attribution to the artwork cannot be easily found - though yes, as Peter and Craig have pointed out to me, sometimes we attribute an "orphan image" after the post goes up when a reader identifies it.

I'm uncomfortable with those posts because in a world of remixes and fun Photoshopped images, attribution and authorship can sometimes be your only coins to bank on. Literally.

Everyone has different comfort zones. Where do you feel comfortable with your images on questions 1-3 above?

-Glendon Mellow

Going Pro: types of copyright

Q: What kinds of copyright are there?

A: Let's have a look at a few definitions, remembering I am not a lawyer, but a fellow freelancing artist-illustrator trying to learn about these things. Despite the fact that it can contain inaccuracies, I will be linking to Wikipedia a lot in this Going Pro: I suggest confirming information with the useful citations and links found at the bottom of the entries.

1) Intellectual property
Most types of copyright fall under intellectual property laws. You'll often hear creative types discussing protecting their IP. What they generally mean, is it's not enough to protect the idea, you have to protect the execution of that idea. Intellectual property as a concept deals with the intangibles of the idea in the mind, and tangibles or artistic creation.

2) Copyright
Copyright refers to the legal right of a creator over their creations. You don't have to register to have copyright (though there may be good reasons to register, covered below). By creating a piece of art, you are now a copyright holder in most countries under the Berne Convention. Congratulations!

Copyrights are usually indicated by the © symbol. You can easily type this into your work in Photoshop or even blogging platforms by typing "[hold down alt]-0169".

3) Moral copyright
Moral copyrights refer to the right to have artwork credited to the creator, even if the economic rights to use the artwork is sold to a client. In some cases, moral rights can also extend to not altering the work.

In an important case in the city of Toronto, Canada, artist Michael Snow had been commissioned by the Toronto Eaton Centre to create an installation sculpture of a flock of Canadian geese, titled Flightstop (right). (Good info on Wikipedia, Jan 2010.) The Eaton Centre placed red bows on the geese for the Christmas holidays, and the artist successfully sued, contesting that they did not have the moral right to alter his artwork, despite that they had paid for it. This is an important example to artists, and I would suggest having a mention of moral rights in any contract.

The result of suing or contesting a disagreement may not always be for money, unless damage to the artists' reputation has occurred. You may be only seeking legal action to restore the artwork to its original state. As a thought experiment (I know of no such examples), what if you were commissioned to paint a barosaurus, and later discovered the client lied about their affiliations with their institution and were now using your work prominently to promote creationism? That may damage your chances to get future work within the scientific community and you would need to redress what has happened to your moral rights.

4) Trademark and registered trademark
Trademarks are a way of identifying an image or product as representing a badge or symbol of a company. You may be a freelancer who incorporates their job, and uses a small symbol to denote your art - that could be your trademark. It's basically a way of identifying your brand, and trademarks refer to a brand.

If your trademark has been infringed, you can sue, but it may be difficult to do so out of a legal jurisdiction to which it originated.

Trademarks are generally noted by the ™ symbol. There's a similar symbol, ℠ for services rather than goods.

Registered Trademarks are usually allowed if you can prove your brand is distinct from all others, and register it with an agency, such as the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office. Individual countries will have similar agencies.

Registered trademarks are noted with the ® symbol.

5) Patent
Patents generally refer to created or invented goods, so are not likely to be relevant to illustrators here at Art Evolved. Unless you invent a spiffy new brush for doing delicate scale work and wish to market it, patents don't need to be covered too much. If you do create a patent, you may want to register it to your country's patent office.

Interestingly, the Danish company Lego has taken legal action in a number of countries against upstart Canadian company MegaBloks. In most cases, Lego has failed, due to the shape of their bricks belonging to patent law and not trademark law, and the patents have expired in many countries. In Canada, I believe the decision was that you could not trademark or patent a geometric shape. Picture at right shows a MegaBlok on the top, and Lego brick on the bottom.

6) Fair-use
So say you are sitting in a lecture at a university about dromeosaurs. And lo and behold, a piece of your artwork appears on the screen, illustrating a species' long running legs. You haven't granted any use to the professor: what's going on? Fair-use is an exception to copyright, allowing educational institutions to skirt the necessity of paying or procuring the right to use artwork for the sake of a single example, in lectures or talks. It may also come into play in journalism, such as a magazine article covering your art show and including a photograph.

Fair use can be a bit of a grey area, and in most districts, something like re-printing your artwork on a handout for a class is still considered a violation of your copyright.

7) Transferred copyright and licencing
In some cases, a copyright can be transferred. When this occurs, the client may ask the artist for unlimited use of their tyrannosaur cartoon for mugs, t-shirts, stuffed toys and so on. Typically, artists charge up to a few hundred percent more than their usual fee before surrendering unlimited, transferred copyright to a client (I would suggest looking at the Graphic Artists Guild Handbook to get an idea of what you should charge - great book).

In some cases, an artist may be hired to make all of their drawings while working for a company. Tim Burton created his Nightmare Before Christmas characters while under a contract to Disney: when he wanted to make the movie, he did it with Disney's Touchstone label, since they had rights to the works. Similarly, Barbie-rival Bratz is alleged to have been created while the Bratz creator worked for Mattel, so Barbie may effectively own the Bratz.

A common licencing arrangement artists may want to consider in any contract, is to grant unlimited rights for a specified time period. If you create that tyrannosaur for unlimited rights, you may want to specify it as only being for the next two years, after which the client's use expires or needs to be re-negotiated. This is useful in case the image you've made becomes a runaway hit, and gives you another shot at further monetary compensations, such as royalties.

In most cases, I would not advise my fellow Art Evolved illustrators to transfer their rights, or grant unlimited licences. It's generally better to work use by use in my experience.

- - - -
I hope this has been a useful reference, and thanks for joining me for another Going Pro here on Art Evolved. Cue the theme music.

Going Pro: Let's Discuss Copyright

Welcome to Going Pro at Art Evolved. Today, we begin to dip our toes into the copyright ocean.

First of all, I am not a lawyer. I do not belong to copyright advocacy groups. I may be wrong about some things I say. I would appreciate any corrections to be backed up with facts and linked references.

I am paying some attention to the issues though, and I thought this would be a useful place to share my knowledge while many of us enter into the dizzying realm of professional illustration together. So whether you are member of Art Evolved who knows the secret handshake, a regular contributor, or an appreciative lurker, this series is for you. (If you’d like to read this series of posts, click on the copyright label below and you‘ll find them all as they are posted.) And this is meant to be an overview, and introduction and most of all to get your mind considering some possible issues about copyright after you have created your art.

Copyright is the boogeyman of art, the dark spectre that looms and tells us to hide our art away. “Your art online could be stolen! You could be being ripped off and you’d never know!“, our adoring public warns. But we brave, foolhardy paleo-artists buck trends anyway. Let’s discuss copyright. There is a lot of ground to cover.

Copyright definitions - what’re we talking about?

Copyright: Authorship of a creative work that provides the exclusive legal right to reproduce, publish and sell that work. Any artist creating artwork automatically owns the copyright to that work unless provisions have been made prior to the start of the project to transfer authorship to the buyer (see work-for-hire).

Source: Graphic Artists Guild Handbook: Pricing & Ethical Guidelines, 12th Edition, p319.

To keep things simple, let’s start with this one definition.

In both my day job and online freelance work, one of the many misconceptions I encounter with copyright is that it needs to be registered to be there. It doesn’t. As the American Graphic Artists Guild definition points out, copyright is automatically deferred to the creator when the work is created.

Think about that. You own those puppies. You are a creator who can reproduce, publish and sell them. Doing all three of those activities leads to a tangle of issues to decide on and grapple with, but being a copyright owner doesn’t. You made it, it’s yours.

The second part of the definition deals with project ownership. A classic case involves Tim Burton’s cult classic The Nightmare Before Christmas. Tim Burton had created many of the character concepts and designs while working as a contract animator for Walt Disney Pictures. Years later, when he returned to the idea of making this project happen, Disney had ownership over Burton’s designs, as he was under their contract when he created them You sit at the Disney desk, signed Disney contract saying you are creating for them, and you don’t get to walk out with the art afterward. Disney produced the film with Burton under their Touchstone production company.

There is a similar case being worked out with Bratz possibly being owned by rival Barbie’s company Mattel.

Another definition:

Copyright is a form of intellectual property that gives the author of an original work exclusive right for a certain time period in relation to that work, including its publication, distribution and adaptation, after which time the work is said to enter the public domain. Copyright applies to any expressible form of an idea or information that is substantive and discrete and fixed in a medium. Some jurisdictions also recognize "moral rights" of the creator of a work, such as the right to be credited for the work. Copyright is described under the umbrella term intellectual property along with patents and trademarks…
…Copyright has been internationally standardized, lasting between fifty to a hundred years from the author's death, or a shorter period for anonymous or corporate authorship. Some jurisdictions have required formalities to establish copyright, but most recognize copyright in any completed work, without formal registration. Generally, copyright is enforced as a civil matter, though some jurisdictions do apply criminal sanctions.

Wikipedia, Oct 11 2009.

Here we have a lengthier definition. First, let’s not get copyright confused with patents and trademarks, but simply recognize that all three are types of intellectual property. To grossly oversimplify, think of patents as having to do with inventions being disclosed to the public, usually for profit, and trademarks as generally being symbols and slogans. Copyright is the artsies’ concern.

You’ll note that Wikipedia includes mention about the reality that works under copyright do not remain so forever and ever. Copyright runs out, often 50 to 100 years of the creator’s death. In some cases it can be passed down. And in the case of something like say, the Sistine Chapel ceiling by Michaelangelo, you must remember that Fuji Film paid for the cleaning, and may have an agreement with the Chapel’s owner’s that no one else may reproduce photos from their efforts for a specified time. That’s not to say you couldn’t copy a portion of the ceiling for say, satirical use in a painting, since Michaelangelo has been dead for more than 100 years. (I haven't thoroughly checked out the Ceiling issue specifically mind you - it's an off-the-cuff example.)

Berne Convention

There are international rules for copyright and protecting the rights of artists. Much of this has been built up from the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, accepted in 1885. The link here is easy to follow, and is cross-referenced with links. There was an update adopted internationally in 1996 for dealing with the internet, called the World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty.


Ground rules for discussion
Keep this stuff in mind and it’ll make everyone’s discussions a little clearer.

-While a lot of discussion happens in the media about music, that’s not what this series is about. It may be useful to draw parallels to the legalities and practices of the music biz and how consumers treat it, but I think we’re interested in visual art and illustration here.

-Copyright is not whatever knee-jerk opinion you have of it is. It is a complicated legal structure surrounding who owns what idea in which material form. So please let’s not clutter up the comments with what people think it ought to be without backing up their statements with real world issues.

-Copyright is not the same country by country. A lot of what I will talk about is Canadian, so keep that in mind. Mention what country you are speaking about. Don’t assume we’re all American.

-The nature of copyright law is changing rapidly in many countries. Here in Canada, Bill C-61 was dropped in 2008. Orphan Works legislation in the U.S.A. possibly offers new opportunities for corporations and tough times for the individual. We'll deal a bit with these issues soon.

-It is possible to navigate the benefits of showing off your art and dealing with the trade-offs that it may be ripped off some time in the future. It happens to top artists as well as amateurs but you don’t make it to the top by hiding your art in the attic.



Homework
This is an introductory post. I’ll start off with a small exercise for people to comment on, shall I?

I live and create the art in Canada. My artwork is uploaded onto Google’s Blogger service, on servers in the U.S. Someone in let’s say, the U.K. accesses the art, and downloads it to their computer. Where was the copyright breach, if there has been one? In which country is the copyright laying? (Hint: not all the info you need is in this example. What important information am I leaving out of this example that can be found in my blog's sidebar?)

Recommended sources
Graphic Artists Guild
Illustrator's Partnership of America
Berne Convention text
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
Creative Commons